# Understanding Pure Textual Reasoning for Blind Image Quality Assessment

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.02441 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.02441/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Multimodal reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 25 of its 32 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 5 Jan 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Multimodal reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/lr/multimodal-reasoning/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 25 of 25)

- [Visual Instruction Tuning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.08485/) (2023)
- [Qwen2.5-VL Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.13923/) (2025)
- [Flamingo: a Visual Language Model for Few-Shot Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.14198/) (2022)
- [MUSIQ: Multi-scale Image Quality Transformer](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.05997/) (2021)
- [Exploring CLIP for Assessing the Look and Feel of Images](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2207.12396/) (2022)
- [Multimodal Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.00923/) (2023)
- [mPLUG-Owl2: Revolutionizing Multi-modal Large Language Model with Modality Collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.04257/) (2023)
- [MANIQA: Multi-dimension Attention Network for No-Reference Image Quality Assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.08958/) (2022)
- [Q-Align: Teaching LMMs for Visual Scoring via Discrete Text-Defined Levels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.17090/) (2023)
- [NIMA: Neural Image Assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1709.05424/) (2017)
- [KonIQ-10k: An ecologically valid database for deep learning of blind image quality assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1910.06180/) (2019)
- [Blind Image Quality Assessment Using A Deep Bilinear Convolutional Neural Network](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1907.02665/) (2019)
- [Blind Image Quality Assessment via Vision-Language Correspondence: A Multitask Learning Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.14968/) (2023)
- [TOPIQ: A Top-down Approach from Semantics to Distortions for Image Quality Assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.03060/) (2023)
- [Q-Instruct: Improving Low-level Visual Abilities for Multi-modality Foundation Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.06783/) (2023)
- [AGIQA-3K: An Open Database for AI-Generated Image Quality Assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.04717/) (2023)
- [Teaching Large Language Models to Regress Accurate Image Quality Scores using Score Distribution](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.11561/) (2025)
- [Depicting Beyond Scores: Advancing Image Quality Assessment through Multi-modal Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.08962/) (2023)
- [Q-Insight: Understanding Image Quality via Visual Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.22679/) (2025)
- [Self-Rewarding Vision-Language Model via Reasoning Decomposition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.19652/) (2025)
- [Adaptive Image Quality Assessment via Teaching Large Multimodal Model to Compare](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.19298/) (2024)
- [Q-Ground: Image Quality Grounding with Large Multi-modality Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.17035/) (2024)
- [Q-Ponder: A Unified Training Pipeline for Reasoning-based Visual Quality Assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.05384/) (2025)
- [Guiding Perception-Reasoning Closer to Human in Blind Image Quality Assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.16484/) (2025)
- [Building Reasonable Inference for Vision-Language Models in Blind Image Quality Assessment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.09555/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Textual reasoning has recently been widely adopted in Blind Image Quality Assessment (BIQA). However, it remains unclear how textual information contributes to quality prediction and to what extent text can represent the score-related image contents. This work addresses these questions from an information-flow perspective by comparing existing BIQA models with three paradigms designed to learn the image-text-score relationship: Chain-of-Thought, Self-Consistency, and Autoencoder. Our experiments show that the score prediction performance of the existing model significantly drops when only textual information is used for prediction. Whereas the Chain-of-Thought paradigm introduces little improvement in BIQA performance, the Self-Consistency paradigm significantly reduces the gap between image- and text-conditioned predictions, narrowing the PLCC/SRCC difference to 0.02/0.03. The Autoencoder-like paradigm is less effective in closing the image-text gap, yet it reveals a direction for further optimization. These findings provide insights into how to improve the textual reasoning for BIQA and high-level vision tasks.